https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25237 Penalty under section 271(1)(c) and Explanation 1 depended on whether the assessee's explanation was bona fide and whether concealment was established. The appellate authorities accepted the assessee's explanation, and the High Court noted that this conclusion rested on factual appreciation rather than any grave error of law. As the proposed questions sought to reopen findings of fact, they did not disclose any referable question of law, and the reference application was rejected. en-us Wed, 21 Oct 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:54:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25237 Penalty under section 271(1)(c) and Explanation 1 depended on whether the assessee's explanation was bona fide and whether concealment was established. The appellate authorities accepted the assessee's explanation, and the High Court noted that this conclusion rested on factual appreciation rather than any grave error of law. As the proposed questions sought to reopen findings of fact, they did not disclose any referable question of law, and the reference application was rejected. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 21 Oct 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25237